/lit/ - Literature

>>22833776
In my industry it's a meme to hide secret references to W.A.S.T.E. in products.
I'm almost entirely sure none of my coworkers have ever read the book and are just parroting the practices of the 70s nerds that started the field.
It's made me really disinterested in reading the book.

Absolute fucking waste of time. This books is literally about nothing.

Was Oedipa groomed into becoming the secret buyer or did I misread the ending completely? Having not done that many psychedelics makes me feel like I'm missing a whole side to Pynchon's earlier works...

I really don't get the hype. Feels like it's written by a skitzo living in his mothers basement who can only relate to the world thanks to his black and white tube TV.

Why does /lit/ praise this guy so much again?

Is it a good idea to start Pynchon with this ?

What does it mean? What is the answer? Is it about the futility of trying to find answers?

Read my first Pynchon novel, Crying of Lot 49, and I found it a decent read but couldn't really get into it. The two biggest problems for me were:
1. The conspiracy wasn't interesting. I understand the point is about paranoia and never being able to fully comprehend a topic, and the audience is meant to be left in the same position as Oedipia - no closer to knowing if any of it is real.
That's all fine, as is how her relatives/confidants all start 'disappearing' in one way or another. My issue is that the actual conspiracy subject matter is dull. I just had no interest in reading about the postal stamps and how one independent organisation was driven out by another etc.

2. Maybe this was misold to me, but Pynchon is renowned for being a comic and the quotes on the cover of the book set this novel up to be hilarious and written by a comedic genius. It was occasionally funny but I rarely found humour in it. There didn't seem to be many jokes being made, and whilst the scenario is somewhat amusing it's not to the extent to carry the book in this regard.

I'd say the novel makes heavier use of the postmodern techniques than I'm used to, but I am a big fan of post-modernists like Vonnegut and Heller, as well as the movement in cinema. I don't think it was the way the novel was written that I had a problem with, but rather it's hard to be invested in such long passages when you don't find their actual content (e.g. postal services) interesting.

Did you like the conspiracy subject matter? Did you find the novel funny?
Would V. or Gravity's Rainbow appeal to me in being funnier/more interesting, or should I expect the same reaction?

What was the point? Just silly satire on going down the rabbit hole? Why was there random le Beatles teen band? Because the 60s? Why did they show MCs husband once? Why was she a whore? Am I retarded? What am I missing?

What did I think of it?

So she got killed by the Holy Roman Empire?

>>19855297
so very, very disappointing. i thought i fell for a meme when i finished it. maybe i did.

Are there any nonfiction books about conspiracies but ones which are true? Something that reads like a Pynchon book. Nothing to do with CIA/FBI though that's an overplayed topic.

Just finished this book, what did I think of it?

Is this worth a read? I'd like to read Pynchon but I know I don't have the focus power to read the longer ones.

>less than 30 pages in
>whore protagonist is already cucking her husband
this is why I don't read postmodernist shite. fuck you guys for recommending this.

what am i supposed to take away from this? was it all a plot by Pierce? Is tristero real? is it a giant coincidence that everyone involved in story either dies or goes insane (except Cohen, Bortz and Fallopian)? What does tristero have to do with the yoyodyne mail system? Is Pynchon playing a joke on the reader?

What the fuck was that third chapter?
It feels completely unrelated to the rest of the book.

Just finished The Crying of Lot 49 and thought it was really good (a re-read might take it up to excellent) but does anyone else find the endings of these types of stories to be pretty weak?
Similar stories where the mystery of the story remains unsolved (like Cache by Haneke or The Trial) are usually really entertaining throughout but it's obvious that they won't give closure so the story just tends to peter out.
I completely understand and agree with why these stories remain ambiguous but I can't help but feel that the price of ambiguity is a weak ending

Does anyone else feel like this?

>The auctioneer cleared his throat. Oedipa settled back, to await the Crying of Lot 49
Stopped reading right there

Started this to see if I could do GR, so far I don't like it. About halfway through and it feels like a slog, nothing makes any sense or has any point. Does it get better?

Just marathoned this. What does /lit/ think? I'm kind on the fence (spoilers) about the end, because I know Pynchon doesn't want to elaborate on anything but I don't think the last 5 pages or so leading up to the crying were particularly interesting

mor elike this